Member Info for PUTUP

Woohoo The power of pennies.

Why on earth would you think something so difficult, something so important, something where the difference of opinion is so large, would take just a few days to agree?

And what makes you think the company is producing 50k bopd?

!!!

"Still kicking a$$ "

It's a wish list. No ar$e being kicked just yet. Judge the outcome not the request list.

Not value neutral. They distributed money to shareholders. So value down by the amount of the distribution. Apart from that, value neutral.

Those who sold into the buyback were smart (or just lucky) in hindsight. Those who increased their investment by not taking their share of the distribution did not do so well. The "Board believes" bit is standard blah blah blah. Don't fall for it. Separate the rhetoric from reality.

Of course there could be any number of post-transaction factors as to why the share price fell. Looks like a completely cr*p little company. Actually, it is a very good example of why you should separate the rhetoric from reality and why, given future uncertainty, you can't look back with hindsight and say management did a great or poor job. They just distributed cash. Shareholders that held got it wrong. Those that sold got it right. In hindsight. Who knows? Could have gone the other way. But it didn't.

Dead horse still being flogged.

(Stock held in treasury are not - and should not be - counted in the calculation of market cap.)

Crude getting slammed

Belgrano you need to add the pricing mechanism to the list (beyond transportation). How the price for Shaikan crude is determined relative to an observable benchmark. Still lots of questions as to what blend Shaikan will feed into and at what (relative) price. Under the 'old regime' we used to have a relatively stable discount to Brent (including transportation) of $23.2 a barrel. Then the KBT discount was introduced to better reflect the quality of Shaikan crude. For the (brief) period in which we had published data for this additional KBT discount, it averaged $11 a barrel. That was a dramatic change.

Still a lot to be worked through and, with it, uncertainty.

what a load of *******s. retail got overly giddy. giddiness now confronting reality. that's all. go back to sleep.

It's not their business specialty. The refineries would not have to be listed. Theoretically, they could be bought privately. But it's not "there oil" (sic). So it would be SOMO selling to the refineries. The IOCs would get their profit share from production and the refinery margins. Agreed re quality of the local refineries.

"I do not think that all this can not be sorted out in a short period of time."

Agreed. The bid-ask is wide and a lot is at stake. The first meeting wasn't until last Wednesday. Quite a lot to be resolved.

FGS the company isn't trading in its own stock. If it bought its shares with the purpose of resale at a higher price then I might agree with you. But they're not. They are bought and cancelled. The 'asset' goes poof. The company doesn't retain anything. I'm sorry to say but you are an amateur in this stuff and unable to learn when presented with reasoned arguments. Let's agree to disagree, but I wouldn't hire you - sorry. I think we've flogged this topic to death. I do appreciate the fact that you like my other posts.

"Putup, a share buyback involves the purchase of an asset, the shares. "

Absolute rubbish. They're cancelled (or used for a purpose that would otherwise entail the issuance of new ones). Continuing this conversation is a waste of my time and yours. Good luck with your view!

@ Nobull. Sorry but yawn. The company buys something that is canceled. It gets nothing. It didn't invest in anything at all. £100 out and nothing in return. Those that don't sell, don't get the distribution and invest more (ownership increases). Those that do sell get the distribution and invest less. The sellers get a disproportionate share of the (very real) distribution. Anyone can decide to participate or not. Individuals make their own decisions and are responsible for those decisions. Their prospects in this stock post buyback depend on that decision and a multitude of other factors that come after it (unless of course they sold their full lot).

Yes, agree to differ. They add exceptional value to me if done at a price above what I think is fair value. I’d sell into it. On the other if they were done at a price below what I want to sell at then I gain by increasing my stake % by not selling while another does sell. But if your perception of fair value is different to mine and you don’t act accordingly then you might perceive that the buyback was detrimental. It all depends on an individual’s perspective. As for the company, they buy nothing. The shares bought are cancelled. £100 just went out the door. That’s it. It’s merely a question of who took the money (and reduced their ownership) and who didn’t (and so increased their ownership by not selling). That’s your responsibility not the company’s. If everyone sold into the buyback pro rata to their ownership then the £100 is distributed pro rata to ownership- just like a dividend. (The change to equity value comes from the reduced share count rather than the shares falling ex div by the dps. The change is still £100.) Guys who stay in want the shares to be bought back below THEIR perceived fair value - of course - because they expect to gain at the expense of those who elect to sell. But that’s based of their perception of value only.

(Someone like Paul aka Jake aka whatever would perceive almost any price, even one multiples above current, to still be cheap. Maybe we can set a buyback at £4 or £5 and everyone except him sells…Who wins and who loses?)

"at the very bottom of the cycle on 15th September "

better to have woken up and bought on 8 Aug 😉

I'm out all day tomorrow so will play catch up on Wednesday. Let's see what happens...

BTW I've done a lot of fairness opinion valuations. Oftentimes a big range can be justified within even modest assumption boundaries and methodologies. And they're always done for a client who's paying the fee...

Anyway, about to drive 8 hours to see a man about a dog. Later.

I posted my response last evening but it was deleted along with many others as Admin cleaned up a little after the whacko. Perhaps you didn't see it. Here's the short version. I don't give a rat's a$se about accounting. (Particularly GKP's.) I care about cash. It's a pointless debate with you as you keep attributing views to me that I've dismissed. Just as Einstein realised there is no absolute time, there is no absolute fair valuation. Fair valuation is in the eye of the beholder. Management need to focus on cash generation and distribution. £100 out the door is £100 out the door. Later!

SpaceTomato has got the giggles. MM aren't particularly active in this stock. Mostly retail trading. I'm sure they've an eye on the 14 day RSI too. Last time it was at these levels was on 2 Oct and before that 14 Feb.

Belgrano, I have no view re extra storage but will listen to your learned opinion. So long as recoverable expenditure fits within the monthly recoverable expenditure window I'm happy. Then Iraq pays for almost everything straight away and our 'cost' is the just forgone share of the extra profit oil.

Back to where we were on the 2nd of Oct or in mid June. Ho hum. But at least we have started contract discussions finally.

The old adage springs to mind "Sell in May, and go away, come back on St. Leger's Day." It would have been much more blissful to have returned on September 15 and forgotten about GKP for the summer.

"When our company does start to receive serious income as a serious shareholder I'd like to see it distributed 3 ways.

firstly R and D, secondly share buyback announced in advance and over several months as an ongoing process. Than divis being given to holders. "

Hidden in here is a useful point. "R&D" isn't a distribution, particularly when there is a mechanism for full recovery of capex in the contract. But GKP should never again 'invest' beyond the monthly cost recovery allowance and so build up the CRP. Capex discipline needs to be the name of the game. (I place 'invest' in quotes because it doesn't carry the same risks as a typical company's capex when there is full and accelerated cost recovery from current production sales.) When the CRP builds we are lending to Iraq - at a zero interest rate. Luckily we've now reached (in normal circumstances) levels of production whereby the cost recovery window is high enough to sustain sensible investment in the field without building the CRP. In fact, when full production resumes GKP would be wise to delay investment and squeeze out the last of the CRP balance, now down to about $50m ex that in the receivables invoices already. Finally they will then have reduced that 'loan' to Iraq to zero. That capital and the $151m of receivables, as and when received, can be paid out of the company to shareholders (via either buybacks or dividends). With a consequently lower valuation (reflecting the cash exiting the business) the share price can normalise to something that more closely reflects the potential of profit from the Profit Oil stream (or whatever similar mechanism exists under the new contract) and be more responsive to the drivers thereto.

"Areas where they still need to reach an agreement include existing contracts between the KRG and oil companies, according to President Barzani.

Representatives of the Iraqi government and oil companies operating in the Kurdistan Region on Wednesday held their FIRST meeting in Dubai"

First meeting was just last week. How quickly do you think they can come to an agreement given their track record? Fingers crossed it's quick but I won't be holding my breath. Chill until we get an announcement from GKP.